Though I reside in the US, I am by no means a part of it culturally. For the purpose of entertainment (mine and yours), I would like to tick off the list of reasons I am different from the standard middle-American culture.
--I hate American news. Though a few US newspapers, such as the New York Times, are passable, I cannot stand any of the US news programs on any of the major networks, from that liberal rag MSNBC News to the sickeningly conservative Fox News. Instead, I read the BBC News online and watch the BBC World program when it is occasionally on PBS. Why? US news tends to be sensationalist, lacking in content, biased, and overly simplified. Graphics and subtitles dominate most of the news programs, and world news and politics are often scrapped in favor of human-interest stories.
--I hate American sports. Baseball, American football, and basketball bore me, and I have always thought NASCAR to be a utter waste of time and money. However, I follow European Pro-Tour cycling fervently, and I am also a fan of Indonesian and Malaysian professional badminton. In fact, I am quite proficient at the sport myself, and I very much enjoy playing in a local league that consists mainly of Indonesian, Malaysian, and Indian immigrants, some of whom used to play professionally.
--I am against American culture in general. In many previous posts, I have questioned the US’s current moral system and culture. As I have said before, I do not appreciate our culture and morality being hijacked by Christian fundamentalism The fact that a significant portion of or population still wants creationism taught in schools is simply frightening to me, as is the fact that Proposition 8 just passed in one of the most liberal states in the country. I would prefer a much more secular society, such as the UK. Additionally, as I have stated before, some of the social constructs I would like to include into our culture would be considered vulgar, blasphemous or imprimatur by many Americans.
--I disagree with the American philosophy of economics. I have always said that the European belief of heavy regulation would benefit us greatly—now, as the global recession looms, economists are predicting the European system, which they have previously written off as “a fossil,” may be better suited to the current crisis.
--I hate the American media. Sadly, our radio, television, and Internet media have all been stricken by the same disease: sensationalism. American television—news and other programming—often simplifies or confuses political issues. Furthermore, almost all US television of it has lost most of its intellectually stimulating aspects, which makes it far less interesting to me. Because of this, the only American shows I watch are NOVA (a PBS science show), a few shows on the Discovery channel, and a sitcom or two on occasion. I do enjoy watching television in general, though—as I said before, I watch the BBC World News, and I am addicted to my favorite television show of all time: Rod Serling’s The Twilight Zone. (Unfortunately, it is only on twice a year, in the form of two “marathons” on the Sci-fi channel on July 4th and New Years Day.)
I suppose I am not being fair to all of America—the ideological half of the country that I live in is far more liberal than the other half—it is the most diverse and cosmopolitan part of the US, and many people here share my sentiments. However, it is far smaller that the other side of our culture, and it is clearly the cultural minority. The other America, though—the place of Sarah Palin, NASCAR, and fried doughnuts—I feel little connection to.
But don’t get the impression that I dislike America—I love my country, and I have a lot of respect for the ideals it represents. However, I feel that America is culturally divided, and I do not represent the majority of American culture in any way.
14 comments:
i agree with many things you said! and hockey is not included, as it is both in the U.S. AND Canada. however, the same goes for basketball and baseball as well. whatever.
and billy, if you are not an american, then are you still apart of something greater, or are you simply off on your own? is it your lack of a need to be apart of something greater that sets you free from your chains to society, or is it that lack of a need that creates a facade of being apart of something greater while secretly keeping you apart of it? in other words, are you truly free, or are you stuck in the group of people who choose act outside and look down upon society?
excuse my spelling errors and poor grammar. i notice some words are missing.
Interesting…I would say that I am culturally free because I have been able to see through and (to some extent) break through my social, cultural, and moral conditioning. This, in its own way, does make me a part of something greater. However, I am not dealing in absolutes. I am by no means totally separate from American culture, and I am “closer” to America in others ways—for example, I respect many of our political ideologies, not matter how poorly they have been implemented. Because of this, I am not really “stuck” in American culture, and I do not really resent it—I pity it more than anything. I suppose my views are a bit cynical, but you have to admit it is sad that most Americans, especially those from the “other America” cannot break free from their conditioning.
to an extent, I agree with your views. while I disagree with many different parts of U.S. society, I am still proud to be a citizen of our country.
if I had a point of view that was more contradictory to yours, I might view yours (technically, our) opinions as those of an elitist. one could say that you are, in a sense, placing yourself above the mob: regardless of whether or not you are, it is not your right to proclaim yourself as such.
I suppose I am only warning you that you are apart of the mob as much as I am, and not to try too hard to be above it. while we may differ from it, it is still our job to embrace it and thrive in it. as American citizens, we are only a few small free-thinking fish in a large American sea, clouded and made hazy by several of the problems you mentioned. If anything, we are the sober partiers, watching our friends parade around in a drunken stupor.
like I said, we must embrace our culture, whether it is to love it and immerse ourselves in it, or to strangle it with our bear hug.
I feel the best thing for us to do is to do our best to resist society without trying to place ourselves too high above it. like I said, we are no better than the mob-but we must still respect it, and we are allowed to resist it as long as we recognize our place. however, there is nothing wrong with having views of your own, and if anything, spread them (since you seem sincere in your belief of them).
lastly, I disagree with on your original title. you are an American, Bill. regardless of your stance on society, you are apart of the whole mess. do not be embarassed by your surroundings-if anything, enjoy them, and view the problems you see in our society as a challenge you must overcome. if anything, your willingness to resist shows how well you capture what I consider the American spirit.
I suppose the title is a bit radical. Yes, I am an American in the way you mean it. I am not an American in the way the "other America" (if you excuse my stereotyping) means it, though. I am not a part of the small-town American culture, as I have already proven.
I do not agree with your statement that we must embrace our culture, though. Like you said, once we break from our social conditioning we have the advantage of being better able to see those who haven't. However, this is no reason to embrace our culture, thought it may be a reason to respect it. After all, isn't America supposed to be about diversity? As long as we are respectful of other cultures and ideas, what's wrong with being different? We may be no better than the mob, but that is not reason to change to be a part of it.
As for elitism...I guess I am something of an elitist for viewing American culture in this way. However, remember that the term "elitism" was coined by those who are perpetually bound to their cultural conditioning and are looking to lash out at those who aren't.
that is all very true. I suppose I am trying to speak from a viewpoint similar to yours while still pointing out an opposing stance. I believe it is impossible to separate yourself from society. an example I can think of is political punk bands. at first, it was a voice, a way of fighting back. it was nonconformity. however, many of them preach the same/similar messages now. they have evolved to the point where they do not conform to society as a whole, but conform to one another. in a sense, they have created a niche in society for themselves and those similar to them. I suppose what I am trying to say is similar to that. even though you are separating yourself from society, you are still apart of the american mob (or machine-that sounds cooler). this creates that same niche for people such as you and I-we believe we are being nonconformist and separating ourselves from society, but we are really conforming to one another.
however, nonconformity is part of what you are talking about, but it is not what you strive for. this, i am a) just realizing, and b) agreeing with. even if you conform to that niche, you are still viewing yourself as different from the rest of society. conformity is not the main issue: the state of society is. conformity and nonconformity are only relevant because you disagree with the state of society. I may be blathering to myself, but I believe it makes sense.
I agree with you on diversity, but I suppose when I meant embracing american society, I meant embracing the beast and loving it for what it is (loving it for hating it is acceptable and applicable).
I do not wish to insult you by calling you an elitist: I simply wish to point it out. It is not only coined and used by those who must lash out at those higher. In the paragraph above, I essentially created a rule about loving society. What gives me the right to make such a rule? Furthermore, I just stated above that it is not only coined and used by those who must lash out at those higher. I am using myself as the example: however, I have just assumed I am one of those higher people through such a statement. Why should I be of a higher level than another, and why do I have the right to name myself as such? It may very well apply to all: if you try to say it is not only used by those of a lower level, and point someone out, the could qualify as elitism. It is a strange contradiction-in order for me to argue against your point, I must myself be an elitist.
I have just realized you did not once use the term "the higher" in your previous comment. I had thought you did. However, you understanding the meaning of the term, even though (I feel) it seems strange and out of place. Other words can be substituted: I'm sure you understand my intent with it.
Conformity an interesting point, though it strays from my original thesis a bit.
I think I can answer your question by using your example of punk bands. These bands obviously make money by being conformist, since they must work with/for the "mob" in order to make money. Thus, any punk band that pretends to be non-conformist or anti-American can be considered phony, and any punk band that truly is anti-American is both hypocritical and ignorant. Because of this, I agree with your statement that it is impossible for us to be entirely non-conformist because we rely on American society to function. But, like you said, this is not the main issue.
I still have problems with your statement that we should love American culture (specifically small town American culture) despite the fact that we are in no way a part of it. Perhaps I am misinterpreting what you are saying...could you clarify "loving it for hating it"?
I am not being malicious; I do not truly hate American culture--I am simply critical of many aspects of it. However, I would like to know why you find (hypothetically) hating a culture is unjustifiable.
Next, on to elitism. I think we have to get away from the obvious negative connotations this word carries, since this seems to be clouding the issue. I do agree with your statement that elitism is not only used by those in the "other America," but I do blame the anti-intellectual culture of this subdivision of America for giving the word its negative connotations. The most popular definition for elitism I can find is: "the advocacy or existence of an elite as a dominating element in a system or society." This is the true meaning of the word, without its new meaning that makes it apply to all of us who are critical of small town American culture. By the original definition I am by no means an elitist; by the new one, I am proud to be one.
first off, while i dont wish to delve too much into the situation of those bands, not all of them are necessarily doing it for money. in fact, part of their status is achieved by signing and staying on a minor record label. i suppose their conformity is not chosen, but instead, it simply occurs by their nature and the nature of their peers.
bill, my comments are loving american culture may seem unusual, and it is possible that they are more a reflection of my own personality than of the actual discussion at hand. i suppose i mean to embrace it: whether you embrace it through loving it or hating it, you are still giving it legitimacy, and recognizing your relationship with it. and while we may say we are not apart of it, it is another strange contradiction. this also relates to the punk bands. we are different, but it is our difference than earns us a niche in our society. by trying to separate ourselves from it, we are both expanding it, and creating a space within it for ourselves.
and as for elitist, i agree about the negative connotations. however, i believe you have just invited them. you have just proclaimed yourself as one of the elite, as a dominating part of society. this is exactly where they come in. i would first like to state that i have no true problems with you as a person. however, regardless of whether or not you fit into that elite, the problem is that you have just handed yourself the title of being an elite. this could be seen as your pride and ego taking over, and one could question what makes you so special that you can crown yourself as one of the elite? this is where the mob comes in. it would not be seen as such a conceited move were it done by someone else. however, you have just named yourself one of the elite. I will say it again, but this makes you come off as self-loving. which is where I believe the negative connotations come from. they stem from the elite's extreme willingness to grant themselves such a title, and from the resentment that grows when others disagree, but their opinions are irrelevant because the elitist themself was the only person who had a say.
that being said, there is nothing wrong with being proud about being elite. me personally, I would prefer to walk with the common people, to suffer as they suffer and thrive as they thrive. I believe its just the concept of handing yourself such a tag that makes it daunting.
I am unsure if I have provided more substance for another discussion, but I am being interrupted and must end this comment here.
Hey bill and brett. I just happened to read the last two comments issued today by each of you. What caught my eye was Billy's comment about (hypothetically) hating society. I believe this could be a practical conviction. What is leading me to say such a thing? Billy's latest work, Culture: the dark side. Within this text Billy made numerous interesting points concerning culture and its manipulation. I would like to then say that society, like culture, could very possibly be manipulated as well. My ideology being society and culture go hand in hand. Culture depends on society to strive, and vice versa. Consequently, a hate of a certain religion can be interpreted as a hate of society. However, that is just a side note to my point. Although I am not anti-american (society wise), i belief it is possible to be. In order to hate society, one must essentially have no opinion concerning nearly anything, because society covers such vast topics of life. Conformity or not, if you have an opinion that you voice, you are part of society. By stating your opinion, you are contributing to society. This leads me to say that the only true way to hate society would be to omit yourself from it. Such as becoming a hermit. Speaking to no one. Excluding yourself from technology, and the ideas of others. By living alone in a cave, a person can truly be unbiased to all opinion, removing him from society that he once hated.
I hope i did not intrude on your conversation. I am only trying to further the discussion after brett's latest post.
Brett--You certainly have opened up a whole new window on this discussion.
First, I think I should clarify my comments on elitism; I think I used some confusing language last time. I am certainly not an elitist in the old sense of the world--I am by no means in control of society or above culture. However, in the new sense of the word, which, as I stated, has come to mean anyone who criticizes the anti-intellectual, small town culture of middle America, I am an elitist.
Next, I think I should also clarify my views on conformity in relation to my disagreements with middle American culture. The example of the punk bands is irrelevant--I was simply using them as an analogy to show how true isolationism from American culture is impossible. Since we live here, we must interact with it on a daily basis. However, this does NOT mean that we have to embrace it; it only means we must respect it for what it is.
Dan—I understand why you think I am fundamentally opposed to culture and cultural manipulation, but this is not the case. If you had read the two posts I mentioned in “culture: the dark side” before this, you would probably think I embraced culture. However, the truth is actually more in the middle: I am wary of both culture and cultural manipulation, but I neither hate nor fear either one. The bottom line is that I believe that culture should serve us, not the other way around. In “culture: the dark side” I was simply pointing out the fact that not all cultural manipulation is good.
As for living in a cave, this is probably the most isolation any of us are capable of achieving. However, just because culture and society can be manipulated, doesn’t mean we should live away from it. Rugged individualism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.
I just tried to post something. safari quit on me.
first off, I believe you have just redefined elitism yet again. however, if your first definition was created with the intention of showing the negative connotations, then I understand.
second, I suppose my comments on embracing society are truer for myself than others. I (usually) have some innate desire to plunge straight into the belly of the beast, and to challenge and absorb all of its goods and evils. I consider it akin to (but not as extreme) a kamikaze pilot. when I say embrace, I suppose I mean to respect it, but also to let it in so one may both evaluate it and challenge it.
this better work this time.
Hmm....I don't think I have redefined elitism; I think you are confusing the fact that the "other America" has given the word both its new definition and its negative connotation (unless you disagree with this). By the new definition, I am elitist because I criticize and disagree with their culture.
Also--in your second paragraph (the one that begins with "second," are you admitting that loving a culture you disagree with is a personal choice, not an obligation?
all apologies. I thought the definition of elitist you cited was the new one.
and it is not an obligation to love it, but like I said, an obligation to respect it and embrace it, whether it be hateful or loving.
Looking back, I find this post pretty ironic, since America is one of the few countries in which you would even be able to make a post like this, bashing your own country's culture...
Post a Comment